- From: Evan Prodromou <evan@prodromou.name>
- Date: Fri, 6 Jun 2025 11:04:07 -0400
- To: emelia <emelia@brandedcode.com>, Ryan Barrett <public@ryanb.org>
- Cc: "public-swicg@w3c.org" <public-swicg@w3c.org>
- Message-ID: <4d8dbad9-5d05-4bc1-bd45-cc80cd02840b@prodromou.name>
`Remove` is fine if the objects in the Collection are unique. `Add` could use some additional (!) properties like: `before`: an ID of the item the object will be immediately before `after`: an ID of the item the object will be immediately after `index`: a number, an exact index in the collection If the objects in the collection are not unique, `Remove` could also use these additional properties, as well as: `relativeIndex`: the index of the item to remove from the collection relative to other copies of the same object; "remove the third instance of this note from the collection". Evan On 2025-06-05 8:52 p.m., emelia wrote: > Hi all, > > I think we'd probably need at minimum a way to signal that the > OrderedCollection has had its ordering updated — I don't think current > Add/Remove activities would be enough here. Move doesn't really offer > the correct semantics for reordering a collection. > > – Emelia > >> On 6 Jun 2025, at 02:29, Ryan Barrett <public@ryanb.org> wrote: >> >> That's a lot! Definitely a maximalist approach. To keep scope >> manageable, and have a prayer of concluding in any reasonable time >> frame, with something we have a chance of getting implementors to >> prioritize, I'd argue that we /not/ try to address all of that. >> >> Specifically, I don't think we need to or should specify how feed >> publishers choose the objects in their feeds, especially not in a >> first pass. There's successful prior art in the wild from Bluesky and >> others that define feeds only as ordered, pageable lists of post ids. >> That allows maximum flexibility for implementations to construct >> feeds however they want, and doesn't tie their hands, but still >> allows interoperability between feed publishers, consumers, and other >> services. >> >> Filtering, aggregation, moderation, algorithms, etc are all great! >> But I don't know that we should bake them into a feed standard. AP >> already has ordered collections; I can see a very manageable first >> pass here at just standardizing "here are my feeds, with some >> metadata, as ordered collections." That, we might actually have a >> chance of getting eg Mastodon to implement by sometime in 2026. 😁 >> >> On Thu, Jun 5, 2025 at 2:22 PM Aaron Gray <aaronngray@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> OOh, also this pipeline design also covers moderation of streams, >> both automated and manual. >> >> And also the algorithmic processing of streams including handling >> streams for younger users who may have their content filtered or >> limited in some way, either timewise or content wise. >> >> Aaron >> >> On Thu, 5 Jun 2025 at 22:19, Aaron Gray <aaronngray@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Evan, >> >> Thank you again for the massive triage process I set in sway >> by my observation of unclosed issues and you embarked on >> handling we are now probably more than two years down the line. >> >> On Thu, 5 Jun 2025 at 19:43, Evan Prodromou >> <evan@prodromou.name> wrote: >> >> We have a few projects in the Fediverse that are doing >> remixing and aggregating content and other activities >> from other Actors. Two good examples are Surf and >> Channel.org. >> >> This is a very interesting area that I have thought about a >> lot over the years. And think it really needs to be more >> generalized to handle and encompass all possible use cases. >> >> Basically theres a pipeline of four processes, that of >> selecting posts from a number of feeds to a number of feeds, >> that of optionally filtering those posts based on criteria, >> that of ordering or sorting of collected posts in some form >> of automated or manual process in those feeds, and that of >> posting the resulting posts to one or a number of output feeds. >> >> I think this is an interesting enough pattern that we >> should open up a Task Force at the SocialCG to >> investigate standardizing some of these features. >> Important questions to ask are: >> >> * How should an aggregated feed appear on the >> Fediverse? Is it just another Actor that Announces >> activities and content that meet its requirements? Or >> is there another structure? >> >> Similar to, in and out boxes for continuity with the existing >> ActivityPub model. >> >> * How do we handle ordering of feeds? Some feeds might >> not be reverse chronologically ordered, but use some >> other algorithmic ordering. >> >> Ideally there is full control over this. And should allow for >> both automated and manual ordering. >> >> * How can feeds be transparent about what the sources >> are? Actors, search terms, hashtags, etc. What is >> coming into this feed? Can consumers inspect the sources? >> >> There should be full control over visibility. >> >> * Is the feed replicable elsewhere? >> >> This brings up the idea of relays too, yes we should allow >> for duplication for both redundancy and handling workloads. >> >> Chairs, I'd like to propose an agenda item to discuss >> this possibility at the next CG meeting. >> >> A meeting I would like to attend. Sorry I am not one for >> dealing with the pragmatic after mouth of prematurely set in >> stone standards, hence my absence from the process once I >> realized the reality of the protocol and its implications. >> >> Evan >> >> Aaron >> >> >> -- >> Aaron Gray - @AaronNGray@fosstodon.org | >> @aaronngray@threads.net | @AaronNGray@Twitter.com >> >> Meta-Mathematician, Independent Open Source Software >> Engineer, Computer Language Researcher and Designer, Type >> Theorist, Computer Scientist, Environmentalist and Climate >> Science Researcher and Disseminator. >> >> >> >> -- >> Aaron Gray - @AaronNGray@fosstodon.org | @aaronngray@threads.net >> | @AaronNGray@Twitter.com >> >> Meta-Mathematician, Independent Open Source Software Engineer, >> Computer Language Researcher and Designer, Type Theorist, >> Computer Scientist, Environmentalist and Climate Science >> Researcher and Disseminator. >> >> >> >> -- >> https://snarfed.org/ >
Received on Friday, 6 June 2025 15:04:12 UTC